|The Gallery at Chez Sarge|
First item on the agenda is officially codifying Juvat's Cinematic Rating Tool, or JCRT for short. (Note to staff, it's okay for Juvat and Tuna to invent these kind of things, but I, Le Sarge, reserve the right to name them. Unless their names are better, then I'll probably just go with whatever they came up with. Yes, I know Tuna came up with a name for something, we'll get to that.) Anyhoo...
So in Juvat's Monday/Boxing Day post he introduced the first practical application of the JCRT, which he had proposed in a comment on my earlier "Top Ten" post. To wit...
We need to come up with a multi faceted rating system. Historical accuracy, Well Told Story, Death and destruction, Probability of being watched by your wife etc.That was the proposal, and of course you got to see the first deployed use of the JCRT. Here are the facets of the multi-faceted JCRT:
- Historical Accuracy
- Well Told Story
- Death and Destruction
- Probability of Spousal Participation
I did change Juvat's original fourth rating in order to more easily acronymize it, so within the JCRT we have the four facets. (I know, I know, I just like calling them facets, Juvat started it):
- HA, or Historical Accuracy
- WTS, or Well Told Story
- D&D, Death and Destruction
- PSP, Probability of Spousal Participation, i.e. will the wife watch it with you or retire to the other room mumbling that she should have married that nice Billy Johnson down the road who became very wealthy selling George Foreman grills. (Ha! As if!)
HA is rather self-explanatory, though one must have some knowledge of history in order to properly apply the facet. This facet is pretty straightforward, very objective. A movie is faithful to history or it's not.
WTS is pretty subjective. One man's brilliant and riveting story could be another's "please kill me" film. (A story so bad that one would rather be put out of one's misery than being forced to continue watching it. Though I suppose getting up and walking out of the theater, or switching off the telly, would be preferred.)
D&D is another subjective facet of the JCRT. It all depends on one's capacity for gore and things blowing up, I suppose the best way to partially describe this is with a film clip...
And no, that's not Juvat and Yours Truly in the clip. (Though I do have a shirt like John Candy is wearing and I swear Juvat has a hat similar to the one sported by Joe Flaherty. Two of my favorite Canadians by the way. I still miss Mr. Candy. A lot. Oh and Joe Flaherty isn't really Canadian. He's from Pittsburgh.)
The most controversial facet of the JCRT is the PSP, or Probability of Spousal Participation. Controversial because we guys can't always fathom what our better halves are thinking or expecting from us. I mean, to me, "Fine!" means that The Missus Herself is totally okay with whatever I want to do. To wit...
"So honey, I'm going to buy this three thousand dollar entertainment system. Okay?"
"Honey, I'm going to go out drinking with the guys. Okay?"
Hhmm, now I understand a few situations where I may have miscalculated.
PSP is a guess at whether or not one's spouse is willing to sit down and watch Saving Private Ryan or Fury with you. A low rating here may be matched by a higher D&D rating. Too gory, and the spousal unit may not wish to watch it, so a high D&D rating might be offset by a low PSP. Hhmm, perhaps we should weight these things. That might make for a more complicated rating system, I don't know.
So, that's the JCRT, comments, suggestions, ideas, and just plain complaints are welcome.
In other news, I got a new phone yesterday, the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge, and it hasn't blown up yet. I take that as a good sign. Had to replace the old S3 as it was just worn out and showing its age. Unplug it from the charger and it would drop right down to 80%. It also didn't like my Mom's place up in New Hampshire, wouldn't hold a charge to save its life I tell ya. (Hhmm, I replaced the cell phone equivalent of me...)
|Meine neues Kommunikationsgerät (Source)|
Happy New Year to all you Chanters though! (Did I just coin a phrase there- a la "Lexicans?")To which I replied.
"Chanters?" Hhmm, I shall have to ruminate upon that. Grudgingly, it does have a certain something. As to "Lexicans," I preferred "Lexians," but was outvoted. (Not sure we actually had a vote, but there it is.)
If the readership is to be known as "Chanters," perhaps we should have a chant? (My vote is for "Who's buying?")
So what say you, the readers? Or Chanters? (Hhmm, not sure I like it. Perhaps it will grow on me.)
So that's it for now, and...
Yeah, the Top Ten lists, which are kind of a new thing here. I started it but called it "A Sarge Top Ten List," but Juvat kind of refined it with "A Chant Top Ten List." So from here on out, they shall be the latter, not the former.
Okay? Back to work, coffee break's over...
* And there you have it ladies and gentlemen, a new record for using the phrase "to wit" in one post has been set today, here at the Chant. Now watch Juvat or Tuna go out of their way to break that record. I double dog dare you! (And no, Juvat did not double dog dare me to stick my tongue to the flag pole at Kunsan Air Base. That was some other Sarge, who may, or may not, have looked like me. Hey, all us maintainers look the same in our olive-drab fatigues, neh?)